What if life does begin at conception?

Discussion in 'Abortion' started by Josephwalker, Jun 11, 2019.

  1. Daniel Light

    Daniel Light Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2015
    Messages:
    31,455
    Likes Received:
    34,888
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Dude - why are lying about what I said.
     
    FoxHastings likes this.
  2. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    First you say it's life then say it's just a fertilized egg so I ask again what if LIFE does begin at conception? Should we make laws based on what if? It's a yes or no question. Don't run and hide with obfuscation this time saying it's just a fertilized egg.
     
  3. Adorno

    Adorno Active Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2016
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    43
    That too is stated in the preceding statements. If you wish to challenge this position, presumably you would want to make an actual argument of some sort (this of course presumes you are interested in rationality).

    Obviously, then that is a different question. You have conflated descriptive and normative claims. Your first question is descriptive in nature "what is the basis of the claim?" - but now you say you already know that. As a result, you suggest that these claims are mistaken (so you don't need to know how the conclusion is supported - you have made an evaluative judgment about the veridicality of the premises). This then relates to the normative functional relationship between moral characteristics and the wrongness of killing. But since the argument specifically states the normative functional relationship (what makes killing wrong), your question once again conflates descriptivity and normativity. So you should have asked what makes these characteristics of personhood morally significant (not what is the basis of the conclusion). Again since you claim that these claims are insufficient, you have already made a judgment about their nature which means you either already understand these claims (in which case your question was disingenuous) or you have made a rushed judgment without understanding the nature of the argument and your point would be, by definition, inadequate (there is another option, that your question is rhetorical, but that would commit the petitio principii fallacy -so that doesn't help either). Hence, if you want to challenge the argument, your next step then is to explain why you hold these claims to be insufficient. This would require you to make an argument that engages the issue of what makes killing wrong. If you just don't understand the claims and want clarification as to the normative functional relationship you should retract your evaluation until you know the argument.
     
  4. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You need to upgrade your understanding of the issues and use more technically correct language.

    "What if life does begin at conception" - Life of what ? We already know that life already exists at conception - and in fact prior to conception so what difference would this make ?

    "Destroying human life" "can we take a chance". You destroyed human life last time you scratched an itch - did you cry real tears - I think not.

    The question is weather or not a human/personhood exists - not if life exists.

    The legal question and the moral question are separate questions. Just because a person might believe that the zygote is a "person" does not mean that argument passes legal muster. For example - the many Catholics go with the belief that a soul is imparted at conception.

    This however is not valid justification for law.

    You argument is "we don't know otherwise". Not only is this logical fallacy - as it does not in any way give proof of claim - but, it is not a valid legal argument.

    Can you imagine if we were to make laws on the basis of "we don't know" /we don't know otherwise"

    This would be the ultimate form of Totalitarianism.
     
  5. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "The question is weather or not a human/personhood exists - not if life exists."

    Exactly and that's the issue isn't it. The rest of your post was nothing but attempted obfuscation from that obvious fact.

    "Can you imagine if we were to make laws on the basis of "we don't know" /we don't know otherwise"This would be the ultimate form of Totalitarianism."

    Exactly my point with the AGW crowd Glad you agree.
     
  6. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My post was not obfuscation - it was responding to the arguments made by previous poster. It is not my fault they were bad arguments - and you have a point with respect to the AGW crowd.
     
  7. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your response was made to me. I was the previous poster and yes everything you said besides what I put in bold was attempted obfuscation
     
  8. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No it wasn't - name one thing that was obfuscation - you are the one obfuscating by making nonsense arguments
     
  9. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well let's start with your opening paragraph.

    "What if life does begin at conception" - Life of what ? We already know that life already exists at conception - and in fact prior to conception so what difference would this make ?"

    Subject he been covered in this thread already several times and everyone knows the debate is not on removing life called a wart or a mole or a germ but about when is the fertilzed egg a human life. Obfuscation on display. If you want to debate the difference in what us life between a bacteria and a human feel free but that has nothing to do with this thread.
     
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2019
  10. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Don't blame me that you use technically incorrect and obfuscative language. You do it again here by using the term human life. A skin cell is human life ? We are talking about the a human... when a human exists .. just because a single human cell (Zygote) is "human life' does not make that cell a living human.
     
  11. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    More obfuscation from the subject at hand. Thanks for proving my point about you and at some point it becomes obvious that someone is just trolling. I've reached that point concerning you. Good evening and goodbye.
     
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2019
  12. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Laughable nonsense - I point out your obfuscation - stating exactly the term you used and how it was an obfuscation - then ask you to use technically correct language and give you the technically correct term ... and you accuse me of obfuscation and trolling.

    Anyone can be wrong - this is just human - it is the fool however that refuses correction. Now run to the playground and stick head deep in the sandbox of denial.
     
  13. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,762
    Likes Received:
    14,563
    Trophy Points:
    113
    At what other time would life begin?
     
  14. Moonglow

    Moonglow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2013
    Messages:
    20,754
    Likes Received:
    8,047
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Then I guess I'm 9 months older, blah!
    When we get wealth equality I will vote for birth equality...and when we stop saying"no one said life was fair".
     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2019
  15. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What if the moon is make of green cheese ? Obviously life is present prior to conception - animate does not come from inanimate.
     
  16. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,762
    Likes Received:
    14,563
    Trophy Points:
    113
    True. I should have asked at what time does humanity start. We have a living ovum and living sperm. But when they join a process begins that results normally in a human child. How, other than time and development, does that child differ from a fertilized ovum.
     
  17. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Especially in anything related to the abortion debate because technically correct terms matter a lot. I like the way you rephrased though. "What time does humanity start" ? This is somewhat different than saying "At what time is a living human present" and more similar to what time is a "Person" present. It is kind of a fusion of both.

    The next thing is to define what is meant by "humanity". What characteristics are required to say that "humanity is present" ? Obviously living human needs to exist but humanity describes something more IMO - the ability to think, feel, have memories. What is it that we value about humanity ? Love, relationships such as friends and family, pleasure, the ability to feel pain and so on.

    Feel free to come up with your own definition of course but, what ever that definition is - it must give us something by which humanity can be measured - otherwise the term is useless.

    Now to your comments - The sperm and ovum are part of the process of the creation of a living human - a process that may result in a human child (not normally as even once the zygote is create the odds of a child being created are still less than 50/50 if memory serves).

    You then ask "how does a child differ from a zygote" other than time and development. First off - it is the "development" part that is the huge difference. The whole point of the argument with respect to humanity -is that the zygote has not yet reached a stage of development where it has requisite characteristics to say that "humanity" exists.

    One could also argue that the zygote does not develop into a human. While the zygote is part of the process of the creation of a human - at this stage of creation - not a single cell of the structure of the human that is being created exists. The zygote is gone after the first mitotic division so it is hard to say that this entity "develops" when it is gone.

    The first cells in the structure of the human being created come after 2-300 totipotent clones of the zygote form the blastocyst - a hollow sack. At this point these totipotent cells (each one capable of creating a living human) start spitting out differentiated and specialized cells that form the embryoblast. These are the first cells in the structure of the human. The totipotent cells are then builders of the structure rather than the structure itself.

    At the zygote stage - within the zygote - is DNA. This DNA will be passed on through replication. Within the DNA is the blueprint and instruction set for creation of a child. Nothing else - aside from perhaps a few atoms but even these might not be present - exists of the child.

    Some wish to claim that this DNA is a child. I personally think this is preposterous nonsense but - OK.. - if this is the claim then where is the rational argument that backs up this claim. How does the DNA meet the definition of Humanity = have all the requisite characteristics.

    Then there is the problem that almost every other human cell has this DNA - and we don't call these other cells "children".

    All this - and more actually- has to be reconciled prior to this claim being proven true.
     
  18. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Thanks for giving people who know biology and embryology a good laugh at how uninformed scientifically is the pro-abortion side.
     
  19. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The child was created when the new life was created and that was at conception. You are only arguing the various stages of a human life that every human who has ever existed transgressed through.
     
  20. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Let's just go to the medical textbooks

    "The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."
    [Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]

    "Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life."
    [Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943]

    "The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."
    [Sadler, T.W. Langman's Medical Embryology. 7th edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1995, p. 3]

    "Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zyg tos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being. The common expression 'fertilized ovum' refers to the zygote."
    [Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1993, p. 1]

    "Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity."
    [O'Rahilly, Ronan and M?ller, Fabiola. Human Embryology & Teratology. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29. This textbook lists "pre-embryo" among "discarded and replaced terms" in modern embryology, describing it as "ill-defined and inaccurate" (p. 12}]

    http://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/ar...yoquotes2.html

    "Recently, Dr. Robert George wrote an article outlining this whole topic in more detail. And if you want to really learn your stuff, pick up his excellent book entitled Embryo (I’m in the middle of reading it right now).

    In his words:
    “That is, in human reproduction, when sperm joins ovum, these two individual cells cease to be, and their union generates a new and distinct organism. This organism is a whole, though in the beginning developmentally immature, member of the human species. Readers need not take our word for this: They can consult any of the standard human-embryology texts, such as Moore and Persaud’s The Developing Human, Larsen’s Human Embryology, Carlson’s Human Embryology & Developmental Biology, and O’Rahilly and Mueller’s Human Embryology & Teratology.” – Dr. Robert George

    “Human embryos, whether they are formed by fertilization (natural or in vitro) or by successful somatic-cell nuclear transfer (SCNT — i.e., cloning), do have the internal resources and active disposition to develop themselves to the mature stage of a human organism, requiring only a suitable environment and nutrition. In fact, scientists distinguish embryos from other cells or clusters of cells precisely by their self-directed, integral functioning — their organismal behavior. Thus, human embryos are what the embryology textbooks say they are, namely, human organisms — living individuals of the human species — at the earliest developmental stage.” – Dr. Robert George
    - See more at: http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/....n2q46hNU.dpuf

    A New, Distinct Human Organism Comes into Being at Fertilization

    It is undisputed that a new, distinct human organism comes into existence during the process of fertilization.[1] Scientific literature states the following:

    • “The fusion of sperm and egg membranes initiates the life of a sexually reproducing organism.”[2]

    • “The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg.”[3]

    • “Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.”[4]

    • “The oviduct or Fallopian tube is the anatomical region where every new life begins in mammalian species. After a long journey, the spermatozoa meet the oocyte in the specific site of the oviduct named ampulla, and fertilization takes place.”[5]

    • “Fertilization – the fusion of gametes to produce a new organism – is the culmination of a multitude of intricately regulated cellular processes.”[6]

    The government’s own definition attests to the fact that life begins at fertilization. According to the National Institutes of Health, “fertilization” is the process of union of two gametes (i.e., ovum and sperm) “whereby the somatic chromosome number is restored and the development of a new individual is initiated.”[7] Thus, in the context of human life, a new individual human organism is initiated at the union of ovum and sperm. One textbook similarly explains: Human development begins at fertilization when a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoon) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to produce a single cell – a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.[8]

    Thus, a new human organism is created before the developing embryo implants in the uterus – i.e., before that time at which some people consider a woman “pregnant.”

    [1] See, e.g., Condic, When Does Human Life Begin? A Scientific Perspective (The Westchester Institute for Ethics & the Human Person Oct. 200, http://bdfund.org/wordpress/wpconten...ife_print.pdf; George & Tollefsen, EMBRYO 39 (200.

    [2] Marsden et al., Model systems for membrane fusion, CHEM. SOC. REV. 40(3):1572 (Mar. 2011) (emphasis added).

    [3] Okada et al., A role for the elongator complex in zygotic paternal genome demethylation, NATURE 463:554 (Jan. 28, 2010) (emphasis added).

    [4] Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012) (emphasis added).

    [5] Coy et al., Roles of the oviduct in mammalian fertilization, REPRODUCTION 144(6):649 (Oct. 1, 2012) (emphasis added).

    [6] Marcello et al., Fertilization, ADV. EXP. BIOL. 757:321 (2013) (emphasis added).

    [7] National Institutes of Health, Medline Plus Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary (2013), http://www.merriamwebster.com/medlineplus/fertilization (emphasis added).
     
  21. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You still have not figured out that coming into a debate on when a child exists - and claiming "it exists at conception" without proving that claim - does not make that claim true. Nor does repetition of claim prove a claim true.
     
  22. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    We already know that life begins at conception. The real question is does personhood? But neither life nor personhood is the key factor. Bodily autonomy is.
     
  23. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    See above, I cited the medical textbooks. Coming into such a debate and not providing anything to support your claim does not make it true nor does repetition of it.
     
  24. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    per·son
    /ˈpərs(ə)n/

    noun

    • 1.a human being regarded as an individual:
    The individual human in the womb

    You're engaged in semantics now. The question is when does that human life begin, at conception.
     
  25. Maquiscat

    Maquiscat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Messages:
    7,915
    Likes Received:
    2,152
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Given that a miscarriage is medically termed an abortion anyway, you're right on the button. What most people think of when they hear abortion is more properly medical abortion, IIRC.

    I don't think we can classify it as an unconscious decision. That would imply her state of mind was a factor. I really doubt that, at least a vast majority of the time.
     

Share This Page